JABG Provisions

The following sections highlight some of the changes introduced under JABG. The accompanying tables compare JABG and JAIBG provisions relating to purpose areas (table 1) and funding, eligibility, and reporting (table 2).

Purpose Areas

Under JABG, the number of authorized purpose areas for expenditure of funds increases from 12 to 16. New areas include developing and implementing systems of graduated sanctions; establishing and maintaining juvenile records systems, programs for assessment of risks and needs (including mental health screening, treatment, and substance abuse testing), and restorative justice programs; and hiring and training detention and corrections personnel.

Other Provisions

Funding. The annual funding level authorized by Congress changes from a maximum of $500 million under JAIBG to a maximum of $350 million under JABG.³ Under both JAIBG and JABG, a small percentage of funds is set aside for certain activities; under JABG, the set-aside for research, evaluation, and demonstration decreases from 3 percent to 2 percent, but the set-asides for training and technical assistance (2 percent) and administration (1 percent) remain the same. The base allocation to each state increases from 0.25 percent to 0.50 percent of funds available after set-asides; any remaining funds continue to be allocated on the basis of state juvenile population. The minimum grant for localities increases from $5,000 to $10,000, and the formula for allocating funds to localities changes to reflect expenditures for juvenile justice rather than law enforcement. For both states and localities, the maximum permissible administrative expenditure decreases from 10 percent to 5 percent of the total allocation.

Eligibility. To be eligible for funds, states no longer must provide the numerous assurances that are specified under JAIBG; instead, they are required to describe plans for using JABG funds (purpose areas and activities), outline criteria for measuring the effectiveness of funded activities, and document efforts to implement a system of graduated sanctions that reflects guidelines set forth in new JABG provisions. Indian tribes continue to be eligible for allocations, but under JABG, tribes may also apply for grants to be awarded on a competitive basis by OJJDP.

Reporting. Under JABG, states and subgrantees are required to submit annual reports that summarize grant activities and assess the effectiveness of these activities. OJJDP will use these reports to develop an annual report to Congress.

Program Element	JAIBG	JABG
Annual funding level authorized (see footnote 3). $500 million. $350 million Set-asides 3% for research, evaluation, and demonstration; 2% for training and technical assistance; 1% for administrative costs. Reduces research, evaluation, and demonstration set-aside to 2%; adds 2% set-aside for tribal grants (see below). Set-asides for training and technical assistance (2%) and administration (1%) remain the same. Allocations to states Allocates 0.25% of available funds to each state. Allocates any remaining funds on the basis of the state juvenile population. Increases each state’s base allocation to 0.50%. Remaining funds continue to be allocated on the basis of the state juvenile population. Allocations to units of local government $5,000 minimum allocation. Formula based on law enforcement expenditures (two-thirds of allocation) and number of violent crimes (one-third). $10,000 minimum allocation. Formula based on juvenile justice expenditures (three-quarters of allocation) and number of violent crimes (one-quarter). Administrative expenditures Maximum 10% of total allocation (state) or subgrant (local). Maximum 5% of total allocation (state) or subgrant (local). Indian tribes Indian tribes are eligible for allocations. Tribes continue to be eligible for allocations but are also eligible for grants to be awarded on a competitive basis by OJJDP. State and local eligibility States must provide assurances that they have addressed certain legislative requirements related to the prosecution of juveniles as adults; graduated, accountability-based sanctions; juvenile record keeping; parental supervision; and drug-testing policy. States must provide information about the activities to be carried out (purpose areas), criteria for assessing the effectiveness of activities, and status of graduated sanctions. Units of local government provide this information to the states. Role of courts NA. In developing grant applications, states and units of local government must consider the needs of the judicial branch and consult with court officials. Graduated sanctions NA. Participation in a system of graduated sanctions by individual courts is voluntary, but states and units of local government must encourage courts to participate. At a minimum, such systems should impose sanctions for each offense; sanctions should escalate in intensity with each subsequent, more serious offense; and the system should be sufficiently flexible to allow for individualized sanctions and services appropriate for each offender. Reporting NA. Each year, states and units of local government must submit a report that summarizes and assesses the effectiveness of JABG-funded activities.

Previous

Contents

Next

Changes to OJJDP’s Juvenile Accountability Program	OJJDP Bulletin • June 2003